Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/475

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

PENNINGTON V. KINO. 463.' �Carroll D. Wright and A. E. Denise^, for complainants; �Frank H. Angier, ioi a^idnaani. �LowELL, C. J. The plaintiffs sue on patent No. 203,069, issued to Pennington and Beggs, April 30, 1878, upou an application filed October 27, 1877, for au improvement in [lawn] sprinklers. In this contrivance, water from a head is to pass through the ordinary socket tubes into a rose of circular shape, with a shoulder, and other bearings and fit- tings, to enable it to revolve freely at a low or a high pressure of the water. The part with which we are chiefly concerned is the rose, which is thus described : �" The rose, C, is provided with a number of discharge holes, d, at the outer circumf erence, -which holes are placed in a plane passing preferably through the hole, B, but bored at a certain angle of inclination through the rose, so as to produce the revolving motion of the saine by the f orcible discharge of the water through the holes." �A smaller number of holes are to be raade, some of which are vertical, and some arranged at an opposite angle from the larger and more numerous holes, in order to retard the speed of rotation and add to the beauty of the jet, The claim is for the combination of the pipes and the revolving rose; as- shown and described. ' �Before the date of this invention, sprinklers were in public use having radial» arms, which were caused to revolve by the force of the water passing out through one and the same side of each arm. Besidee this, two patents are ptoduced which' describe sprinklers much like that of the plaintiffs. The Kirby patent. No. 197,773, was granted December 4, 1877, upon an application filed November 9, 1877. This patent was some months earlier, but the application some da'ys later, than that of Pennington and Beggs. In t?he absence of other evidence of the dates of invention, the first application must be taken to represent the first invention. I have, there- fore, not examined the Kirby patent. . ' �The other patent is that of Nathaniel D. Olark, No. 148,- 596, dated March 17, 1874. This sprinkler is like the plain- tiffs', except in the revolving chamber, br rose. I ' copy Clark's description of this part of his invention : ��� �